{
  "id": 2950199,
  "name": "Philip K. Russell, Defendant in Error, v. George S. Cochran, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Russell v. Cochran",
  "decision_date": "1917-03-20",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,087",
  "first_page": "418",
  "last_page": "419",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "204 Ill. App. 418"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 162,
    "char_count": 2062,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.546,
    "sha256": "ccb385625cde2cc08fcb7fbf08b2f81600fc589a27ebe69866f2b75014c614b7",
    "simhash": "1:cb7b9596d58ca0f0",
    "word_count": 352
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:49:07.214052+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Philip K. Russell, Defendant in Error, v. George S. Cochran, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McGoorty\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Judgment, \u00a7 132 \u2014when trial court does not abuse its discretion in refusing to set aside default and vacate judgment. Where an affidavit filed in support of a motion to vacate a default judgment failed to show any diligence or any reason why the party did not appear in court when summoned, held that the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to set aside the default and vacate the judgment, even though such party may have had a meritorious defense.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McGoorty"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Carl W. Kellman, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Albert H. Meads and Victor B. Scott, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Philip K. Russell, Defendant in Error, v. George S. Cochran, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,087.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 8 \u2014what is jurisdiction of in cases of fourth class. In cases of the fourth class, the Municipal Court of Chicago has jurisdiction in actions in debt as well as in contract.\n2. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 29*\u2014when presumed that trial court acted in accordance with rules of in entering judgment. In the absence of the rules of the Municipal Court of Chicago properly before the Appellate Court, it will be presumed that the trial court acted regularly and in accordance with its rules in entering judgment upon the claim before it.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Courtney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 20, 1917.\nRehearing denied March 30, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Philip K. Bussell, plaintiff, against George S. Cochran, defendant, upon a foreign judgment for the recovery of money. From a judgment by-default for plaintiff for $962.33, and denial of a motion to vacate the judgment and for leave to defend, defendant brings error.\nCarl W. Kellman, for plaintiff in error.\nAlbert H. Meads and Victor B. Scott, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0418-01",
  "first_page_order": 444,
  "last_page_order": 445
}